XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Sun, 11 Jan 2015 11:53:28 +1100, felix_unger  wrote:   
   .   
   >On 11-January-2015 5:11 AM, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   >   
   >> On Sun, 04 Jan 2015 14:49:22 -0600, Free Lunch  wrote:   
   >> ..   
   >>> On Sun, 04 Jan 2015 12:48:47 -0500, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 10:35:21 -0600, Free Lunch    
   wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On Thu, 01 Jan 2015 23:15:38 -0500, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 10:23:45 -0600, Free Lunch    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>> .   
   >>>>>>> On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 07:44:26 -0500, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>> ...   
   >>>>>>>>     No. If there is a designer then it's pretty obvious that he made   
   use of the   
   >>>>>>>> evolutionary method of developing life on this planet, even though we   
   can't jump   
   >>>>>>>> in the "lab" with him and see exactly how he went about making it   
   take place.   
   >>>>>>>> That's one of the basic starting lines atheists are unable to get as   
   "far" as.   
   >>>>>>>> Can you?   
   >>>>>>> Show us your evidence that a designer did something. As far as I can   
   >>>>>>> tell, your argument is that science is right, but that you want to add   
   a   
   >>>>>>> designer that you have absolutely no evidence for, a designer that is   
   >>>>>>> indistinguishable from nothing   
   >>>>>>     Yet WE have no reason to believe the proof you demand should be   
   available to   
   >>>>>> humans, much less do any of us have any idea what you're imaginig it   
   should be,   
   >>>>>> or where it should be, or why it should be available to us, or when it   
   should   
   >>>>>> have been or should be made available. Your supposed criticism means   
   NOTHING,   
   >>>>>> and you can't even pretend it does mean anything as you consistently   
   prove every   
   >>>>>> time you're challenged on it.   
   >>>>> I never demand proof. I ask for evidence.   
   >>>>     YOU ARE evidence.   
   >>> You keep making that foolish claim. Repeating it ten thousand times will   
   >>> not make it true.   
   >>      Pointing out that I keep pointing it out won't make the fact stop being   
   >> true. Nothing will or can make it stop being true, in fact.   
   >   
   >his claim that it's untrue (whether it is or not) does not make it   
   >untrue, just as his claim of 'no evidence' for God does not make any   
   >evidence disappear!   
      
       His own dishonesty is what makes HIM evidence. The dishonesty of so many   
   atheists in general is what makes THEM evidence, and the high number of people   
   being so blatantly dishonest supports the fact that they ARE evidence.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)